Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 vs Google Chirp 2
Accuracy and speed
Left gets fewer words wrong. Lower has the final text ready sooner.
- Transcribe Stream 11.90% · 123ms
- Chirp 22.59% · 568ms
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is ahead of Google Chirp 2 on both datasets together, the Pipecat Dataset, time to first text and final-text delay. The Ocular Dataset is too close to call. Google Chirp 2 has a newer release: Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 vs Google Chirp 3.
Last updated Methodology by Dileep Chagam
Who is better at what
- Overall WER2.21%3.01%
- Pipecat Dataset WER1.90%2.59%
- Ocular Dataset WER2.78%3.80%
- Time to first text730ms4.50s
- Final-text delay123ms568ms
Lower is better on every measure. Too close to call means the likely ranges overlap.
Transcribe Stream 1 vs Chirp 2 FAQ
Which is more accurate, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 or Google Chirp 2?
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is more accurate on both datasets. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 2.21% and Google Chirp 2 3.01%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 0.80 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 1.90% and Google Chirp 2 2.59%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 0.69 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is more accurate on both datasets. On the 1,000 public Pipecat clips, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 2.21% and Google Chirp 2 3.01%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 0.80 points. On the eight licensed Ocular recordings, Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 scores 1.90% and Google Chirp 2 2.59%, so Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 makes fewer errors by 0.69 points. Word error rate counts incorrect, missing, and extra words, so lower is better.
Yes. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 finishes the transcript 3.77s sooner. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 has the final transcript 730ms after the speaker stops and Google Chirp 2 4.50s, at the median. Both are measured on the same 206 streamed turns.
Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 is the stronger pick for voice agents: it makes fewer errors on real conversations and finishes the transcript 3.77s sooner. A voice agent cannot reply until the final transcript arrives, and the Ocular recordings are real conversations.
Yes, both return partial text before the speaker stops. Fish Audio Transcribe Stream 1 shows first text after 2.78% and Google Chirp 2 after 3.80%, at the median.
Test your voice agent the same way.
Cekura runs these simulated calls on your agent and scores every one.